^^--.^ 




























-5^ 



c 













^0' 




V ^->.,^* • 







.^" .... *-: 








^ ^r.O" ° -, '<>. 









aV -^ 














0" .' 



o'- 



^o V 






'Ao' 



<i. .<^ • 



A- ^ ° f^' -'• 









'^'^ ,s^^ 






V' 









o > 



■.', ^.. .,s* ..>Va-- X^J" :'j^\ *-^,^* •>-■"'- '-^ A 






7 - vP "3 



<^ 



- :V,^ ^ 



<* 



tf 



•'-Vo^' .■:^^'. "^,/ -*/''^- 



o V 

0^ 



1^ 









.^ 






o 
o 



.<^ 

























G^ ^'^' 












^^^ 






...-^ ,G^ 

c' 



<3 >-f^.- 



' ,G^ 

Q V , « O 



.-' .G^ ^- ^' 



•\ 









'^0^ 

:^°^- 



The 
Cost of Growing Timber 



>'■ 



BY 

r: sVkellogg, 

Secretary Northern Hemlock and kardwood Manufacturers Association, 



Jl 



AND 



E.^A. ZIEGLER, 

Director Pennsjlvauia State Forest Academj' 



1911. 

AMERICAN Lumberman. 
Chicago. 



CONTENTS 

Introduction 4 

Elements of Cost 5 

Land Value and Stocking 5 

Administration and Protection 5 

Taxes 6 

Rate of Interest 7 

The Yield 7 

Present Stumpage Prices 8 

White Pine 8 

Loblolly Pine 9 

Longleaf Pine 10 

Red Oak 12 

Yellow Poplar 13 

Douglas Fir 13 

Proportion of Difterent Elements in Total Cost 14 

Conclusions 15 

APPENDIX 

Cost Tables ". 1 ^ 

Land and Stocking 1/ 

Taxes 1 ^ 

Administration and Protection 18 



2 A 



FOREWORD. 



At the seventh annual meeting of the Xatioual Liiiuber Manufacturers' 
Association in Seattle, Washington, July 12-14, 1909, we presented a paper 
entitled "How Much Does It Cost to Grow Timber?" The discussion 
occasioned by this paper and subsequent further study of the subject have 
led us to revise the original manuscript and publish it in the present form 
in the belief that the principles set forth are sound and will help toward 
a clearer conception of the conditions which must be established in the 
United States if forest conservation is to be a reality. This statement is 
made with a full realization of the difficulty in forecasting yields and 
stumpage prices and with the certain knowledge that many, perhaps all, 
of the assumptions necessary to the exposition will be keenly criticized by 
someone — forester or lumberman. Nevertheless, it is only through such 
discussions as these that clear thinking upon a highly important question 
can be attained, and it is in this spirit that the following pages are offered 
to the reader bv THE AUTHOKS. 



THE COST OF GROWING TIMBER. 



INTRODUCTION. 

Four-fifths of the timber standing in the United States today is 
privately owned. Only one-fifth of it is now in State and National Forests, 
and it is not likely that for many years to come even as much as half of 
the total stumpage of the country will be in public forests. In the future, 
as in the past, we must depend on private forests for much of our wood 
supply, and the manner in which private forests is handled is therefore of 
great economic importance. 

Practically all of the lumber so far used in the United States" has come 
from natural, matured forests. Capital has found a profit, and sometimes 
a great profit, in buying up virgin timber in advance of the demand and 
holding it until it could be either manufactured or sold to manufacturers 
at a heavy increase in price over that paid at the time of purchase ; that is, 
much of the profit made in the lumber industry so far has been a speculative 
profit. The exhaustion of the supply of virgin timber will lessen the 
chances for speculation and more closely restrict profits to those which arise 
from growing and manufacturing timber. 

The so-called "cost of production" now calculated by manufacturers is 
merely a harvesting cost, not a cost which includes the expense of growing 
the timber as well as that of logging and manufacturing it. The gTowing 
of timber is analogous to the growing of wheat or corn, except that in the 
latter case the crop is sown, grown, harvested, and marketed within a year, 
while in the former case the same series of operations may require from 
50 to 100 years. The elements of cost are the same in both. Capital will 
seek investment in raising neither wheat nor timber unless there is a reason- 
able chance for profit. We have abundant data upon the cost of producing 
the great agricultural staples, but few data upon the cost of growing 
timber. 

A permanent timber supply will not be maintained by private effort' 
at less than the cost of production. With sufficient knowledge of the cost 
of land and stocking, gi'owth and yield, we can estimate what the cost of 
gi-owing any kind of timber will be and compare it with the present 
stumpage price. This comparison will show whether the stumpage price 
may be expected to go lip or down in the future and will indicate the 
minimum amount we may have to pay for timber. Of course, we have no 
assurance that timber will eventually sell at the bare cost of production, 
for, if a great shortage results because of our general imprudence in failing 
to grow timber, or because of unexpectedly heavy demands for it, the 
selling price will go far above the cost of production. On the other hand, 
if a certain species gi'ows slowly and yields lightly, or if the soil which it 
requires be too expensive, so that the cost becomes abnormally high, it may 
be superseded by timber of other kinds, which may be grown more cheaply. 
In this case, the price would never equal the cost of production. 

It is the purpose of this paper to present a method of analysis of the 



elements of cost in growing timber. The assumptions made are thouglit to 
be fair and to approximate the usual conditions under which the various 
species must be grown. With a right method of computation established, 
those who have need to do so can supply the necessary factors and determine 
the cost of production for particular cases. With "these considerations in 
mind, the following discussion is given: 

ELEMENTS OF COST. 

There are five main elements of cost in the growing of timber. They 
are: (1) The value of the land; (2) the stocking of it with young trees"; 
(3) the administration of the operation and the protection of the growing 
timber; (4) the taxes; (5) the rate of interest. 

The profit or loss at the end of a given period will be determined bv 
the relation between the combined amounts of these investments at the 
proper rate of interest and the value of the stumpage of the resulting stand 
of timber at prices then obtainable ; or, the total amount of the investments 
at compound interest, divided by the total yield, will give the absolute cost 
of production per unit of yield. 

In Tables 1 to 6 are brought together the best figures and available 
estimates upon six important species— white pine, loblolly pine, longleaf 
pme, red oak, yellow poplar and Douglas fir. Tlic following basic 
assumptions are made: 

LAND VALUE AND STOCKING. 

The land as such, regardless of what forest growth there may be on it, 
and assumed to be unfit for ordinary agricultural crops, is valued uniformly 
at $3 per acre. 

Assuming that the laud must be fully planted with young trees a 
charge of $7 per acre is allowed. The results obtained by the State' of 
New York and other extensive planters indicate that this amount should 
be sufficient m planting, operations of considerable magnitude. Of course, 
if cut-over land is restocking naturally with young trees, it is worth more 
than bare land, but the increased cost of the land should be approximately 
equal to the amount that would have to be spent for planting. Planting 
should be unnecessary in many cases, since it is often possible to obtain 
natural reproduction at low cost, if proper cutting methods are used 
Whether we assume a value of $3 per acre for bare land and a cost of 
planting of $7 yer acre, or allow $10 per acre for land naturally stocked 
with young trees, the initial investment remains the same. For these 
reasons the cost of land and stocking are summarized together in the tables 

Many will probably think that the charges for land value and stocking 
are placed too low, and this is probably true in certain instances. It is 
deemed better, however, to calculate the cost of growing timber with the 
lowest possible original investment, than to run into figures wiiich, while 
entirely true for some conditions, will yet seem preposterous to the unin- 
formed. There is also some merit in" placing the fixed charges for all 
species at the same amount. This brings out more clearly the°differences 
in final costs due to growth and yield. 

ADMINISTRATION AND TROTECTION. 

The cost of administration and protection will vary greatly with local 
conditions and the size of the operation. In these calculations, they are 



combiued and eonservativel}'' estimated at 5 cents per acre annually. I'ro- 
teetion means chiefly the keeping out of fire, and on large tracts, the neces- 
sary labor force can be so managed as to make the amount of this item 
comparatively small. 

Lumbermen maintain, and often justly so, that at present conditions 
are too hazardous to warrant the long time investment required to produce 
timber. It is assumed in this paper that the forest owner has the benefit of 
more efficient State and local measures for fire prevention than now prevail. 
Until he has, he is not likely to look favorably on timber growing on a 
large scale as a legitimate commercial enterprise. The risk from fire, wind 
and insects cannot be closely predicted any more than can the future price 
of lumber. We know that eventually fires will be controlled, though occa- 
sionally forests will be destroyed, even with the best system. On the whole, 
damages from wind and insects are light and local and do not lead to such 
heavy losses as does fire. 

There is now no insurance for standing timber in this country, nor 
will there be until our forests are somewhere near as safe as the German 
forests. Until conditions become such as to make either commercial or 
mutual insurance feasible, there remains an element of hazard in timber 
investments, allowance for which will be made by each investor as seems 
to him best. Where reasonable protection is not furnished, permanent 
forest investment is impossible. 

TAXES. 

Two methods of taxing timber are shown : Case 1, the method now 

in general use, and Case 2, a proposed tax upon the yield only, to be paid 

when the timber is cut. 

Case 1. 

Taxes as now levied are extremely variable, but they average about 1 
per cent of the actual value of the property. Since assessors pay little 
attention to young growth before it reaches merchantable size, the taxes 
are assumed to be equivalent to 30 cents per acre per year (or 1 per cent 
of the initial cost of land and stocking) up to the date when it is possible 
to make the first cut. Thereafter they are placed at 1 per cent of the 
actual stumpage value of the timber plus the original land value ($3 per 
acre), with reassessments at the periods for which yields are given. With, 
the exception of loblolly pine, this is every ten years. 

Case 2. 

If a given investment nets 4 per cent, an annual tax of 1 per cent 
(one-fourth of the annual income) is equivalent to a final tax of one-fourth, 
or 25 per cent of the yield. Since we do not know what stumpage values 
will be when the timber is cut, the calculation of the tax on yield is made 
by simply reducing the yield by the same percentage as the percentage of 
tax, and then figuring the cost of producing this reduced yield without 
taxes ; that is, if 25 per cent of the selling price of the stumpage goes to 
the public in lieu of annual taxes, the cost of growing the timber is the 
same as if 75 per cent of the given yield had been obtained with no tax 
at all. 

With the interest rate at 5 per cent, the final tax must be 20 per cent 
to yield a return equivalent to a 1 per cent annual tax, and similarly, with 



interest at G per cent, the linal tax becomes 1G% per cent. If timberland 
were valued and taxed annually according to the income it produced,, the 
two methods would yield exactly the same amount of tax. 

As a matter of fact, the present method of taxing is not applied in 
the scientific manner outlined in Case 1, so that the two methods would 
give still more widely divergent results in practice than those indicated in 
the subsequent tables. The tax on yield (Case 2) is higher than the common 
tax for the shorter ])ci'iods (except for small yields and low stumpage 
prices) and lover in the longer periods. Since the tax on yield is graduated 
according to production, it takes the same proportion of the income at all 
periods, while the general property tax takes an increasing proportion, and 
must sooner or later force cutting. In other Avords, the present system of 
taxation tends to undcrtax young growth and overtax larger timber. 

The tax on yield falls at a time when the owner of the timber is best 
able to pay; hence, unlike the general property tax, it has no tendency 
to make him cut when the market is overstocked or before the timber has 
reached the most prolitable cutting stage. 

IJATE OF IXTKIJKST. 

Kates of interest depend largely on the degree of confidence in the 
in\estment, or the risk iuAolved^ and also upon the ease with which the 
money invested can be recovered. Thus, government bonds net about 2 or 
3 per cent; well-secured bonds of established corporations, 4 or .5 per cent; 
real estate mortgages, from 4 to G per cent; industrial stocks, from 5 to 7 
per cent. Farm rents in older communities are regarded as satisfactory by 
local capital if they give a net income of 4 or 5 per cent. 

Forest land is usually the poorest land in the region. Often it 
could be used for no other purpose. A forest investment is a long time 
one. With proper protection it is safe and requires little attention upon 
the part of the investor during the time that it runs. Four per cent is 
satisfactory in a wide variety of investments which are attended by small 
risk and extend over a long time. For these reasons 4 per cent has been 
chosen as conservative in forest calculations. The effect of higher rates of 
interest is also discussed in connection with the tables. 

THE YIELD. 

For white pine, loblolly pine, and yellow poplar the yields are based 
on tables compiled from actual stands on good forest soil of various ages 
and fully stocked, such as should result from planting. For longleaf pine, 
red oak, and Douglas fir the yields are based on extensive growth studies 
and on estimates of the number of trees per acre, calculated on a knowledge 
of their requirements and carefully checked with other species of similar 
requirements, whose normal stand per acre is known. The figures assumed 
for both of the above groups are supported by data on growth and yield 
published in the report of the National Conservation Commission. The 
average size of the timber is given in diameter at breast height, the standard 
point of measurement. The yield is stated in thousands of board feet of 
square-edged lumber. Thinnings which will be necessary from time to 
time should pay their cost and in some cases give net returns which are 
not included' in the tables. The common practice in New England is to 
cut round-edged lumber from second-growth white pine for the box factories. 



If it is desired to calculate such material, the yields given in the tables 
should be increased about 20 per cent. 

Lumbermen ma};- object that the yields are too liigh, since the finest 
stands of virgin forest do not yield so much. The comparison of a natural 
untended forest with a planted or tended one is parallel with that of a 
'Volunteer" crop of wheat wholly untended with one carefully drilled in 
on well-plowed ground. The cultivated crop can always be expected to 
give the larger yield. 

PRESENT STUMPAGE PRICES. 

The pj-esent stumpage prices quoted are only approximations, since a 
number of factors, such as ease of logging, stand per acre, distance from 
market, etc., cause wide variations. Stumpage prices actually obtained vary 
according to age only in a rough way as the- timber appears to the buyer 
large, medium or small. ]Most of the timber on the market now is either 
very old virgin stuff or young so-called "sap timber." For consistent calcu- 
lations, however, it is necessary to assume stumpage values in the tables and 
grade them according to age. For this purpose they are deemed fair. 

WHITE PINE. 

Assuming the factors mentioned, the outlook for white pine under the 
conditions specified in Table 1 is very good. Case 1 shows a stumpage cost 
of $2.96 per thousand feet at 40 years and a stumpage price of $5. The 
stumpage cost is below the present stumpage price to between 70 and 80 
years. At 80 years the cost is $9.61 per thousand, with an estimated 
stumpage price of $9 per thousand. At 90 years the cost is $3.95 per 
thousand more than the estimated selling price. From 90 years on the 
cost and selling price would rapidly diverge as the effect of compound 
interest became greater. 

Case 2, in Avhich there is a tax on the yield only, shows a much more 
favorable condition for investors in the older age classes. Up to nearly 
50 years this method makes the cost slightly greater than under Case 1, 
but still much under the selling price. For older timber the tax on yield 
alone gives a reduced cost as compared with the ordinary method. At 90 
years the difference is $4.74 per thousand in favor of the tax on yield. 

Placing the original cost of land and stocking at $15 per acre instead 
of $10 gives reproduction costs under Case 1 of $4.15, $4.68 and $6.18 per 
thousand feet at 40, 50 and 60 years, respectively^all well below the 
stumpage prices. 

Table 1. — White Pine in Xew England. 

CASE 1. 

Land and stocking, .$10 per acre ; administration and protection, 5 cents per acre : 

taxes, 10 cents per acre, up to 40 years ; thereafter, 1 per cent actual value, with re- 
assessment every 10 years ; interest, 4 per cent. 

Present 

Land Adminstra- stumpage 

Age and tion and Total Size, Yield Cost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost. in. M. ft. per M. perM. 

40 .$45.01 $4.75 $ 9.50 $59.26 0.7 20 $2.96 $5.00 

50 08.07 7.G3 26.43 102.1.3 9.0 30 3.40 6.00 

60 102.20 11.90 61.09 175.19 10.7 38 4.61 7.00 

70 152.72 18.21 122.71 293.64 12.0 45 6.53 8.00 

80 227.50 27.56 225.19 480.25 12.9 50 9.61 9.00 

90 338.19 41.40 387.67 767.26 14.5 55 13.95 10.00 



CASE 2. 

No annual tax on land or limlxn- : final tax. 2") per cent of yield. Other factors as 

in Case 1. Present 

Laii* Administra- A'ef stumpage 

AGE and tion and Total Size, yield.ii Cost price 

Yks. stocking, protection. Ta<ces. cost.* in. M. ft. per M. per M. 

40 $45.01 $4.75 One $49.76 6.7 15.0 $3.32 $5.00 

50 68.07 7.63 quar- 75.70 9.0 22.5 3.36 6.00 

GO .. .. 102.20 11.90 ter 114.10 10.7 28.5 4.00 7.00 

70 . 152.72 18.21 of 170.93 12.0 33.7 5.07 8.00 

80 . 227 50 27.56 yield 250.06 12.9 37.5 6.80 9.00 

r»0.'. 338.19 41.40 379.59 14.5 41.2 9.21 10.00 

♦ Excluding taxes. 

t Three-fourths of total yield, one-fourth deducted in lieu of taxes. 

The cost of production mounts rapidly with higher rates of interest. 
At 5 per cent, in Case 1, with the other factors unchanged, the taxes in 
50 years amount to $32.63, administration and protection to $10.47, land 
and stocking to $111.67, a total of $154.77, or $5.16 per thousand, an 
increase of $1.76 per thousand over the cost at 4 per cent. At 60 years at 
5 per cent, the taxes come to $76.17, administration and protection $17.68, 
land and stocking $183.79, a total of $277.64, or $7.31 per thousand, $2.70 
per thousand more than at 4 per cent. If a stumpage price of $7 per 
thousand for 60-year-old timber is obtained, it will give practically 5 per 
cent on the investment under the conditions above specified. 

With interest at 5 per cent, and the only tax one of 20 per cent of the 
yield, the stumpage cost in 50 years will be $5.09 per thousand, and in 60 
years, $6.63 per thousand. Using 6 per cent interest in the calculation 
"gives for Case 1 a cost of $7.90 per thousand at 50 years, and of $11.89 
per thousand at 60 years. Taxing the yield 16% per cent, with 6 per cent 
interest, m'C get a cost of $7.83 per thousand at 50 years, and of $11.19 at 
(iO years. With the older-age classes, the increase in cost by using 6 per cent 
is even more marked. 

The growing of wliite pine in Few England at present stumpage prices 
should be profitable. On a 50-year rotation under the conditions specified 
in Case 1, there is $2.60 per thousand profit above 4 per cent interest on 
the investment. At 60 years, the net profit above 4 per cent is $2.39 per 
thousand, and at 70 years, $1.47 per thousand feet. Judged from the 
economic standpoint alone, white pine stumpage prices have gone high 
enough. They leave a safe margin above the actual cost of production to 
encourage the inrestor. 

LOBLOLLY PINE. 



The method of estimating the cost for loblolly pine (Table 2^ is 
identical with that for white pine, except that a reassessment is assumed 
every 5 years to correspond with the yields, which are for 5-year periods. 
Owing to the very rapid growth of loblolly, or old-field pine, in the coastal 
region of the Carolinas, A^irginia, and Maryland, the first yields can be 
obtained in 25 years under favorable conditions. The figures indicate a 
cut of 12,000 feet at that age from fully stocked stands. This is of timber 
averaging nearly 8 inches in diameter, which is suitable for boxes and crates. 
At 40 years the estimated yield is 19,000 feet per acre of timber averaging 
10.6 inches in diameter, which will make small lumber or railroad ties. 
The estimated cost is $3.42 per thousand under Case 1, and $3.48 under 



Case 2. At 50 .years, the yield is 23,000 feet of 12-inch timber, which 
means a range of from 8 inches to 18 inches. The data at hand do not 
furnish sufficient basis for detailed estimates beyond 50 years. For larger 
material, say 70 years old, the cost would rise to about $8 per thousand. 

Table 2. — LohJolhj Pine in the Caroliinis and Virginia. 

CASE 1. 

Land and stocking, ijllO per acre; administration and protection, 5 cents per acre; 
taxes 10 cents per acre, up to 25 years ; thereafter. 1 percent actual value, with re- 
assessment every .5 years ; interest, 4 per cent. 

Present 

Land Administra- stumpage 

Age and- . tion and Total Size, Yield Cost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost. in. M.ft. per M. per 31. 

25 ij; 23.6G .$ 2.08 .■? 4.1G .$ 29.90 7.8 12 $2.49 ?2.00 

30 29.43 2.80 6.52 38.75 8.9 15 2.58 2.50 

35 36.4G 3.68 10.12 50.26 9.8 17 2.96 3.00 

40 45.01 4.75 15.24 65.00 10.6 19 3.42 3.50 

45 .55.41 6.05 22.31 83.77 11.4 21 3.99 4.00 

50 68.07 7.63 31.86 107.56 12.2 23 4.68 4.50 

CASE 2. 

No annual lax on land or timber; final tax, 25 percent of yield. Other factors as 

in Case 1. Present 

Land Administra- Net stumpage 

Agf. and rion and Total Sixe, ijield^ Cost price 

Yes. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost.* in. M.ft. per M. perM. 

25 $ 23.66 ,$ 2.08 One Sp 25.74 7.8 9.0 $2.86 $2.00 

30 29.43 2.80 quar- 32.23 8.9 11.2 2.88 2.50 

35 36.46 3.68 ter of 40.14 9.8 12.7 3.16 3.00 

40 45.01 4.75 yield 49.76 10.6 14.3 3.48 3.50 

45 55.41 6.05 61.46 11.4 15.7 3.90 4.00 

50 68.07 7.63 75.70 12.2 17.2 4.40 4.50 

* Excluding taxes. 

t Three-fourths of total yield, one-fourlh deducted in lieu of taxes. 

Since much of the loblolly pine grows upon soil that has considerable 
agricultural value, the effect of higher priced land must be taken into 
account. Allowing $15 per acre for land and stocking, under Case 1, the 
cost at 40 years is $4.67 per thousand, and at $20 per acre it is $5.92 per 
thousand, which is very reasonable. 

With either method of taxation, the cost of producing loblolly pine is 
low, and in most eases less than the present stumpage prices. It will 
evidently pay to grow loblolly pine timber under such conditions as above 
specified. 

LONGLEAF PINE. 



Longleaf pine is a sloM-growing species, and it requires almost 90 years 
to ^ach a size attained by loblolly pine in 50 years, or by white pine in 80 
years. Moreover, the trees will not grow in as dense stands as white pine. 
This lessens the yield. It is assumed in Table 3 that the first cutting stage 
will be reached in 70 years, when the timber should average about 10 inches 
in diameter and give a yield of 17,000 feet per acre, the same yield as for 
loblolly pine at 35 years. In longleaf pine the first cutting diameter is set 
higher than in loblolly or white pine, because longleaf is not so suitable 
for box boards and other small-sized material. It will be noted how tre- 
mendously the cost of growing increases with age, due to the effect of 
compound interest and comparatively small yields. At 70 years under the 
common method of taxation, the estimated cost is $12.20 per thousand. At 

10 



lUO years, with timber avuragiug only a little more than 1-i inches in 
diameter, which means a range of from 10 inches to 20 inches, the cost is 
$22.28 per thousand; and at 120 years, with timber averaging 16.4. inches 
in diameter the cost is $42.23 per thousand. While taxes pile up heavily, 
they are far from being the most important item in the investment. Most 
of the cost is due to the interest upon the land and growing stock. At 70 
years this amounts to more than four times as much as the taxes, and at 
120 years it is over three times as much. The cost for administration and 
])rotection ranges from $1.07 per thousand at 70 years to $3.61 per 
thousand at 120 years. 

With the only tax one of 25 percent of the yield, the cost is slightly 
greater throughout than under Case 1. This is because the stumpage price 
is low and the yield small. With higher stumpage prices and yields, the 
tax on yield is more favorable to the owner than is the areneral property 
tax. 



TaliK 



-Ltntyli-uf I'iiic in llic Soiiih. 



CASE 1. 



Land and stocking-, .$10 per acre; adminsitration aud protection. ■"> cents per acre; 

taxes, 10 cents per acre up to 70 years, thereafter 1 percent actual value, with reassess- 
ment every ten years : interest, 4 percent. 

Present 

Lund Administra- stumpage 

AGi." iind tioii and Total Hisc, Yield Cost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Tajses. cost. in. M. ft. per M. peril. 

70 .$ 152.72 .$18.21 .$36.43 .$ 207.3G !).9 17 !fl2.20 .$2.00 

80 227.50 27.56 58.3(; ;!13.42 11.4 23 13.63 2.50 

90 338.1!) 41.40 93.64 473.23 12.9 28 16.90 3.00 

100 502.05 61.88 149.03 712.96 14.2 32 22.28 3.50 

110 744.60 92.20 234.37 1.071.17 15.3 35 30.60 4.00 

120 1,103.63 137.08 364.04 1.604.75 16.4 38 42.23 4.50 

CASE 2. 

No annual ta.x on land or timber: iinal tax, 25 percent of yield. Other factors as 

in Case 1. Present 

Lund Administra- Net stumpage 

Age and tion and Total 8ize, yields Cost price 

Yks. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost.* in. M.ft. per M. perM. 

70 .$ 152.72 $18.21 One $ 170.93 9.9 12.7 .$13.46 .$2.00 

80 227.50 27.56 quar- 255.06 11.4 17.2 14.83 2.50 

90 338.19 41.40 ter 379.59 12.9 21.0 18.08 3.00 

100 .502.05 61.88 of 563.93 14.2 24.0 23.50 3.50 

110 744.60 92.20 yield 836.80 15.3 26.3 31.82 4.00 

120 1,103.63 137.08 1,240.71 16.4 28.5 43.53 4.50 

* Excluding taxes. 

t Three-fourths of total yield, one-fourth deducted in lievi of taxes. 

The conclusion to be drawn from the longlcaf j)ine table is that, 
under the conditions specified, it can not be grown prolitably. The stump- 
age costs arc higher than it is likely that stumpage prices will go. It 
may be that 100 years hence longlcaf pine stumpage averaging 14 inches 
in diameter will sell for $22 per thousand, but the chance that it will do so 
is not great enough to lead capital to purchase bare land and plant it to 
longleaf pine trees. 

If we are to have longleaf pine permanently we must evidently favor 
it. Since the greatest element of cost is the land and stocking, this item 
should be decreased if possible. If the investor can get longleaf pine land 
with sufiicicnt young growth upon it eventually to produce a full merchant- 

11 



able crop for $5 per acre, instead of $10, as given in the table, he will have 
a stumpage cost of $6.55 per thousand at 70 years, with the present method 
of taxing, and of $7.33 per thousand, with the only tax one of 25 percent 
of the yield. With land and stocking at $5 per acre, the stumpage cost at 
100 years becomes $12.54 per thousand in the first case, and $12.98 in the 
second. Thus, while the growing of longleaf pine is not an attractive 
investment to the man who must pay from $5 to $10 per acre to start with, 
the outlook becomes more favorable for the owners of large areas on which 
natural reproduction can be secured at low cost by leaving a few seed trees 
and keeping out fires. Under such conditions there is an opportunity for 
the profitable growing of longleaf pine. 

BED OAK. 

The first cut for red oak is set at 40 years, with timber averaging 10.3 
inches in diameter, which should give a range of from 6 inches to 16 inches 
and a yield of 11,000 board feet. The estimated cost (shown in Table 4) 
is $5:39 per thousand for Case 1, and $6.07 per thousand for Case 2. Wliile 
in both cases the cost of production runs above the present stumpage prices, 
it is not excessive vmtil 80 years, when it is $14.02 per thousand for Case 1, 
and $13.64 for Case 2, with a yield of 25,000 feet of timber averaging 16.7 
inches in diameter. At 90 years, with a tax on yield only, the cost is $18.70 
per thousand for timber averaging 18 inches in diameter, which will give 
many trees running up to 24 inches or more. With the increase which may 
be expected in stumpage prices, the chance for profitably growing red oak 
of the smaller sizes is evidently very good. 

Table 4. — Red Oak in the Southern Hardwood Region. 

CASE 1. 

Land and stocking, $10 per acre ; administration and protection, 5 cents per acre ; 

taxes, 10 cents per acre up to 40 years, thereafter 1 percent actual value, with reassess- 
ment every 10 years : interest, 4 percent.- 

Present 

Land Administra- stumpage 

Age and tion and Total Size, Yield Cost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost. in. M. ft. per M. per M. 

40 $ 45.01 $ 4.75 $ 9.50 .$ 59.26 10.3 11 $5.39 $2.00 

50 68.07 7.63 17.06 92.76 12.4 15 6.18 3.00 

60 102.20 11.90 31.01 145.11 14.1 19 7.64 4.00 

70 152.72 18.21 55.37 226.30 15.4 22 10.29 5.00 

80 227.50 27.56 95.52 350.58 16.7 25 14.02 6.00 

90 338.19 41.40 159.74 539.33 18.0 27 19.98 7.00 

100 502.05 61.88 259.47 823.40 19.0 29 28.30 8.00 

CASE 2. 



Xo annual tax on land or timber ; final tax, 25 percent of yield. Other factors as 

in Case 1. Present 

Land A&mitiistra- Net stumpage 

Age and tion and Total Sixe, yield^ Cost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost.* in. M.ft. per M. peril/. 

40 $ 45.01 $4.75 One- $49.76 10.3 8.2 $6.07 $2.00 

50 68.07 7.63 quar- 75.70 12.4 11.2 6.76 3.00 

60 102.20 11.90 ter 114.10 14.1 14.3 7.98 4.00 

70 152.72 18.21 of 170.93 15.4 16.5 10.30 5.00 

80 227.50 27.56 yield 255.06 16.7 18.7 13.64 6.00 

90 .338.19 41.40 379.59 18.0 20.3 18.70 7.00 

100 502.05 61.88 563.93 19.0 21.8 25.87 8.00 

* Excluding taxes. 

t Three-fourths of total yield, one-fourth deducted in lieu of taxes. 

12 



YELLOW POPLAR. 

. The prospects for yellow poplar, shown in Table 5, are somewhat 
better than for red oak. It grows a little more rapidly, gives a little greater 
yield, and has a correspondingly lower reproduction cost. At 50 years 
there is an estimated yield of 18,000 feet of timber averaging 12.8 inches 
in diameter, costing $5.17 per thousand under Case 1, and $5.61 under 
Case 2. Yellow poplar is such a highly useful wood that it will always be 
needed by our varied industries. We can evidently obtain the smaller sizes 
at a cost which is not excessive. If we want big trees we must pay a high 
price for them. 

Table 5. — Yellow poplar in the southern hardwood region. 

CASE 1. 

I-aiid aud stocking, $10 per acre; administration and protection, 5 cents per acre; 

taxes, 10 cents per acre up to 40 years ; thereafter 1 percent actual Talue, with reassess- 
ment every 10 years : interest, 4 percent. 

Present 

Ijond Administra- stumpage 

AGE and tion and Total Size, Yield Oost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost. in. M.ft. per M. per M. 

40 $ 45.01 $4.75 $9.50 $59.26 10.5 12 $4.94 $2.00 

50 08.07 7.63 17.30 93.00 12.8 18 5.17 3.00 

60 102.20 11.90 32.44 146.54 14.7 23 6.37 4.00 

70 152.72 18.21 59.42 230.35 16.1 25 9.21 5.00 

80 227.50 27.56 103.31 358.37 17.3 27 13.27 6.00 

90 338.19 41.40 172.71 552.30 18.5 29 19.04 7.00 

100 .'502.05 61.88 280.34 844.27 19.5 31 27.23 8.00 

CASE 2. 

No annual tax on land or timber ; final tax, 25 percent of yield. Other factors as 

in Case 1. Present 

Land Adminiatra- Net stumpage 

Age and tion and Total Size, yield^ Oost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost.* in. M. ft. per M. per M. 

40 ? 45.01 $4.75 One- $49.76 10.5 9.0 $5.53 $2.00 

50 68.07 7.63 quar- 75.70 12.8 13.5 5.61 3.00 

60 102.20 11.90 ter 114.10 14.7 17.2 6.63 4.00 

70 152.72 18.21 of 170.93 16.1 18.7 9.14 5.00 

80 227.50 27.56 yield. 255.06 17.3 20.3 12.56 G.OO 

90 338.19 41.40 379.59 18.5 21.8 17.41 7.00 

100 .502.05 61.88 563.93 19.5 23.2 24.31 8.00 

* Excluding taxes. 

t Three-fGurths of total yield, one-fourth deductod in lien of taxes. 

DOUGLAS FIR. 



From every viewpoint, Douglas fir is one of the most interesting 
species. There is more of it now standing than of any other timber in the 
United States. It grows rapidly in extremely heavy stands, and can be 
protected cheaply. 

Table 6 gives estimates of the cost of growing Douglas fir in the 
region of its best development ; that is, in western Washington and Oregon. 
The first cut is placed at 40 years, with an average diameter of 10.6 inches, 
and a yield of 24,000 feet per acre. This makes the cost of production $2.47 
per thousand in Case 1, and $2.76 in Case 2. At 70 years, with timber 
averaging 18.4 inches in diameter and ranging from 14 inches to 28 inches, 
the yield is 50,000 feet per acre, making the cost $4.50 per thousand in 
Case 1, and $4.56 in Case 2. At 100 years, with timber averaging more 

13 



than 2 feet in diameter, and a yield of 70,000 feet per acre, the cost is 
$11.46 per thousand for Case 1, and $10.74 per thousand for Case 2. 

Table G. — Dour/las fir in ncsteni Oregon and Washinc/ton. 
CASE 1. 



Land and stocking. .$10 per acre ; administration and protection, 5 cents per acre : 
taxes, 10 cents per acre up to 40 years ; thereafter 1 percent actual value, with reassessment 
every ten years ; interest 4 percent. 

Land Administra- 
Age and Hon and 

Yrs. stocking, protection. 

40 .$ 45.01 $ 4.75 i 

50 68.07 7.63 

60 102.20 11.90 

70 152.72 18.21 

80 227.50 27.56 

90 .338.19 41.40 

100 502.05 61.88 













Present 








Net 


stwmpage 




Total 


Size, 


Yield 


Oost 


price 


Taxes. 


cost. 


in. 


M.ft. 


per M. 


per M. 


; 9.50 


? 59.26 


10.0 


24 


$ 2.47 


$1.00 


17.30 


93.00 


13.7 


35 


2.66 


1.25 


31.21 


145.31 


16.2 


43 


3.38 


1.50 


54.29 


225.32 


18.4 


50 


4.50 


1.75 


91.22 


346.28 


20.5 


57 


6.08 


2.00 


149.00 


528.65 


22.5 


64 


8.26 


2.25 


238.26 


802.19 


24.3 


70 


11.46 


2..50 



CASE 



No annual tax on land or tinibei- ; final tax 25 percent of yield. Other factors as in 
Case 1. 

Present 

Land Admlnistra- Net stumpage 

Age and Hon and Total Size, yield Cost price 

Yrs. stocking, protection. Taxes. cost.* in. M. ft.-\ perM. per M. 

40 $45.01 $4.75 One .$49.76 10.6 18.0 $2.76 $1.00 

50 68.07 7.63 quar- 75.70 13.7 26.3 2.88 1.25 

60 102.20 11.90 ter 114.10 16.2 32.2 3.54 1.50 

70 152.72 18.21 of 170.93 18.4 37.5 4.56 1.75 

80 227.50 27.56 vicld. 255.06 20.5 42.7 5.97 2.00 

90 338.10 41.40 379.59 22.5 48.0 7.91 2.25 

100 502.05 01.88 563.93 24.3 52.5 10.74 2.50 

^Excluding taxes. 

i'Three-fourths of total yield, one-fourth deducted in lieu of taxts. 

Because of the rapid growth and heavy yield, there is a possibility 
of getting more than 4 percent from a Douglas fir investment. At 5 per- 
cent, the cost of growing 50-year-old timber is $4.15 per thousand under 
Case 1, and $4.36 per thousand under Case 2. At 60 years, it is $5.70 per 
thousand for Case 1, and $5.86 per thousand for Case 2. With a 6 percent 
interest rate, the cost of production at 50 vears is $6.49 per thousand for 
Case 1, and $6.70 per thousand for Case 2. At 60 years it is $9.67 and 
$9.88 per thousand, respectively. 

All things considered, the outlook for Douglas fir is distinctly encour- 
aging. The price of stumpage is certain to advance, and an increase of 
only two or three dollars per thousand will bring it to reproduction prices 
for ages up to 70 or 80 years. Such increases and far greater ones will 
likely take place befoi-e the timber can be grown. Cut-over Douglas fir 
land containing a sufficient quantity of young growth is evidently an 
excellent investment at $10 per acre. On the large areas of fir forests 
which are still intact, natural reproduction can be obtained at less than 
planting cost and profits increased accordingly. 

PEOPOETION OF DIFFEEENT ELEMENTS IN TOTAL COST. 

In order to see more clearly the influence of the various factors in the 
cost of growing timber, the percentage of the total cost contributed by 

14. 



taxes, protection, and land and stocking, at ages of 50 and 90 years, under 
Cases 1 and 2, are given in Table 7. 

Table 7. — Proportion of total cost of groxciiuj timber caused by different factors under 

conditions specified in TaHles 1 to 6. 

CASE 1. 

FIFTY-YEAR OLD TIMBER XIXETY-YEAR OLD TISIBEK — 

Administra- Administra- 
tion and Land and tionand Land and 
Taxes, protection, stocking. Total. Taxes, protection, stocking. Total. 
Species — Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. Percent. 

White Pine 25.9 7.5 66.6 100 50.5 5.4 44.1 100 

Loblolly Pine 29.6 7.1 63.3 100 

Longleaf Pine . . ... ... 19.8 8.7 71.5 100 

Red Oalv 18.4 8.2 73.4 100 29.0 7.7 62.7 100 

Yellow Poplar 18.6 S.2 73.2 100 31.3 7.5 61.2 100 

Douglas Fir 18.6 8.2 73.2 100 28.2 7.8 64.0 100 

CASE 2. 

All species 20.0 8.1 71.9 100 20.0 8.7 71.3 100 

These percentages sliow immistakably that with the exception of old 
white pine, taxed according to present methods, much the largest proportion 
of the total cost is due to land and stocking, as it should be. On the other 
hand, if present methods of taxation are strictly carried out, they take an 
increasingly larger share as the timber grows older. For 90-year white 
pine they amount to more than one-half the total cost, due to high stumpage 
prices, and for red oak, yellow poplar, and Douglas fir of the same age the 
taxes come to 28 to 31 percent of the total cost. The low percentage of 
taxes for longleaf pine at 90 years is because at tliat age it has not yet 
reached either a high yield or great value. 

The statement for Case 2 emphasizes the point previously made thai 
in some instances young growth is undertaxed by present methods, while bv 
the same methods older timber is almost invariably overtaxed. It mai 
easily happen, therefore, that while land and stocking usually constitut* 
much the largest proportion of the cost of growing timber, tJie present 
system of taxing may be the determining factor in the decision as to 
whether or not forest conservation shall be practiced in a given region. 
With the tax on yield alone, the proportion of taxes to the total cost is 
the same in all ages. 

The cost of administration and protection is low throughout. In no 
instance does it equal 9 percent of the total cost of growing the timber, 
and usually is less than 8 percent. Timber can be protected cheaply, and 
the cost of protection should not be a serious obstacle to forest conservation. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

The purpose of this paper is to outline a method of investigation into 
the cost of growing timber rather than to say definitely what the costs, 
yields, and stumpage prices will be for the various species in particular 
localities. 

Certain general conclusions, however, can be drawn. It is evident 
that present stumpage prices of white pine are at a point where the growing 
of this timber should yield from 4 to 6 percent compound interest for a 
40 to 70 year investment, with land and stocking costing not more than 
$10 per acre. The growing of loblolly pine should now offer a return of 
4 percent compound interest for investments of from 30 to 50 years, with 

15 



land and stocking at $10 per acre. At the present rate of increase in 
stumpage values, red oak, yellow poplar, and Douglas fir will shortly bring 
remunerative prices. It is probable that cottonwood, red gum, southern 
white ash, and redwood have a rate of growth that will include them in the 
list of species which will soon reach stumpage prices covering the cost of 
growing. There is little room to doubt that with all these species the 
stumpage will reach a reproduction price long before the timber can be 
grown. 

Present virgin timber is nearly always of gTeater age than can be 
grown with profit hereafter. This old timber usually has a larger percentage 
of the higher grades than "second-growth" or young timber. Hence, in 
value, virgin stumpage must be compared, not with the cost of the younger 
timber, but with that of the older classes. Under present methods of taxa- 
tion, and to cover a 4 percent investment, virgin timber values should 
eventually rise to at least the cost of growing saw timber from 12 to 24 
inches in diameter, say averaging 16 inches, except in cases where cheaper 
woods or other materials will furnish satisfactory substitutes. 

This entire discussion has assumed an intelligent public conception 
of the value of forest property and the necessity for its protection from 
fire. Until such a sentiment crystallizes into efficient measures, rigidly 
enforced, many forest investments will continue to be hazardous. In some 
localities conditions are already such that forest investments on a moderate 
scale are reasonably safe. 

Because of the long investments required, the cost of growing timber 
becomes unreasonable when high rates of interest are demanded. If private 
capital is unwilling to engage in it for an income of 4 to 5 percent, then 
the sooner a large proportion of the permanent timber land of the country 
comes into possession of the state or national governments, the more 
hopeful will be the outlook for future timber supplies. The chief concern 
of the state and national governments is the public welfare, and, moreover, 
they can profitably engage in operations at an even lower rate of interest 
than 4 percent. 



16 



APPENDIX. 



COST TABLES. 

To facilitate calculations of the cost of growing timber, the following 
tables, which show the charges for land and stocking, taxes and protection 
b}' decades from thirty to one hundred years, at various rates, have been 
23repared. The amounts for the several items are identical with those given 
for the corresponding items in Tables 1 to 6 of the text, except that in the 
latter tables the value of the bare land, assumed to be $3 per acre, is 
deducted from the totals, since the land remains an asset at the end of the 
operation. For strict calculations, therefore, the value of the land after 
cutting takes place should be deducted from the totals for land and stocking 
shown below : 

LAKD AND STOCKING. 

OBIGINAL COST, $5 PEK ACRE OKIGIXAL COST, $10 PEK ACRE — 

Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount 

at 3 at i at 5 at 6 at 3 at i at 5 at 6 

Years — percent. percent, percent. percent. percent, percent. percent, percent. 

30 $12.14 $ 16.22 .1! 21.61 I? 28.72 $ 24.27 .•? 32.43 .$ 43.22 .$ 57.44 

40 16.31 24.01 35.20 51.43 32.62 48.01 70.40 102.86 

50 21.92 35.53 57.34 92.10 43.84 71.07 114.67 184.20 

GO 29.46 52.60 93.40 164.94 58.92 105.20 186.79 329.88 

70 39.59 77.86 152.13 295.39 79.18 155.72 304.26 590.77 

SO 53.20 115.25 247.81 528.99 106.41 230.50 495.61 1,057.99 

90 71.50 170.60 403.65 947.35 143.01 341JL9 807.30 1.894.70 

100 96.09 252.52 657.51 1,696.56 192.19 .505Tb5 1,315.01 3,393.13 

— ORIGINAL COST, $15 PER .iCRE ORIGINAL COST, $20 PER ACRE 

Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount 

at 3 at .} at 5 at 6 at 3 at i at 5 at 6 

Years — percent. percent, percent. percent. percent, percent. percent, percent. 

30 $36.41 $48.65 $ 64.83 $ 86.15 $48.55 $ 64.87 $ 86.44 $ 114.87 

40 48.93 72.02 105.60 154.29 65.24 96.02 140.80 205.71 

.-)0 65.76 106.60 172.01 276.30 87.68 142.13 229.35 368.40 

60 88.37 157.79 280.19 494.82 117.83 210.39 373.58 659.77 

70 118.77 233.57 456.40 886.16 158.36 311.43 608.53 1,181.54 

80 159.61 345.75 743.42 1,586.98 212.82 461.00 991.23 2,115.97 

90 214.51 511.79 1,210.96 2,842.05 286.01 682.39 1,614.61 3,789.40 

100 288.28 757.57 1,972.52 5,089.69 384.37 1,010.10 2.630.02 6,786.25 

TAXES.* 

AMOUNT AT 3 PERCENT A.MOUNT AT 4 PERCENT 

Yearly Yearly Yc<irly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly 

cost per cost per cost per cost per cost per cost per cost per cost per 

acre, acre, acre, acre, acre, acre, acre, acre. 

Years — lO cents. 15 cents. 20 cents. 25 cents. 10 cents. 1.7 cents. SO cents. 25 cents. 

30 $ 4.76 $ 7.14 $ 9.52 $ 11.89 $ 5.61 $ 8.41 $ 11.22 $ 14.02 

40 7.54 11.31 15.08 18.85 9.50 14.25 19.01 23.76 

50 11.28 16.92 22.56 28.20 15.27 22.90 30.53 38.17 

60 16.31 24.46 32.61 40.76 23.80 35.70 47.60 59.50 

70 23.06 34.59 46.12 57.65 36.43 54.64 72.86 91.07 

SO 32.14 48.20 64.27 80.34 55.12 82.69 110.25 137.81 

90 44.33 66.50 88.67 110.84 82.80 124.20 165.60 207.00 

100 60.73 91.09 121.46 151.82 123.76 185.64 247.52 309.41 

* If it is desired to compute the taxes at some rate not given above, the amount may 
be obtained by using either the figures given in the table for protection or by combining 
them with those In this table. For example, the total tax at a rate of 19 cents for sixty 
years at 3 percent is equivalent to the total tax at 4 cents ($6.52 in the protection table) 
plus the total tax at 15 cents ($24.46 in the tax table), or $30.98. 

17 



Yearly 
cost per 
acre. 
Years — 10 cents. 

30 $ 6.64 

40 12.08 

50 20.93 

60 35.36 

70 58.85 

80 97.12 

90 159.4G 

100 261.00 



AMOUNT AT 


5 PERCENT 


AMOUNT AT 


6 PERCENT 


Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly 


cost per 


cost per 


cost per 


cost per 


cost per 


cost per 


cost per 


acre, 


acre, 


acre. 


acre. 


acre. 


acre. 


acre. 


15 cents. 


20 cents. 


2S cents. 


10 cents. 


l'> cents. 


SO cents. 


25 cents. 


.? 9.97 


$ 13.29 


$ 16.61 


.? 7.91 


$ 11.86 


$ 15.81 


? 19.76 


18.12 


24.16 


30.20 


15.48 


23.21 


30.95 


38.69 


31.40 


41.87 


52.34 


29.03 


43.55 


58.07 


72.58 


53.04 


70.72 


88.40 


53.31 


79.97 


106.63 


133.28 


88.28 


117.71 


147.13 


96.80 


145.19 


193.59 


241.99 


145.68 


194.25 


242.81 


174.66 


262.00 


349.33 


436.66 


239.19 


318.92 


398.65 


314.12 


471.17 


628.23 


785.20 


391.50 


522.01 


652.51 


563.85 


845.78 


1,127.71 


1,409.64 



ADMINISTRATION AND TUOTECTION. 





AMOUNT AT 

Yearly Yearly Yearly 


3 PERCENT 

Yearly Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly 


AjrOUNT AT 4 PERCENT ■ 

Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly 




cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 




per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 




acre, 1 


acre, 2 


acre, 3 


acre, .J 


acre, 5 


acre, 6 


acre, 1 


acre, 2 


acre, S 


acre, // 


acre, 5 


acre, 6 


Yrs. 


cent. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cent. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


30.. 


.$0.48 


.?0.95 


$1.43 


$1.90 


$2.38 


$2.85 


$0.56 


$1.12 


$1.68 


$2.24 


$2.80 


$3.37 


40. . 


. .75 


1.51 


2.26 


3.02 


3.77 


4.52 


.95 


1.90 


2.85 


3.80 


4.75 


5.70 


50. . 


. 1.13 


2.2G 


3.38 


4.51 


5.64 


6.77 


1.53 


3.05 


4.58 


6.11 


7.63 


9.16 


(30.. 


. 1.63 


3.26 


4.89 


0.52 


8.15 


9.78 


2.38 


4.76 


7.14 


9.52 


11.90 


14.28 


70.. 


. 2.31 


4.61 


6.92 


9.22 


11.53- 


13.84 


3.64 


7.29 


10.93 


14.57 


18.21 


21.86 


80. . 


. 3.21 


6.43 


9.64 


12.85 


16.07 


19.28 


5.51 


11.02 


16.54 


22.05 


27.56 


33.07 


90. . 


. 4.43 


8.87 


13.30 


17.73 


22.17 


26.60 


8.28 


16.56 


24.84 


33.12 


41.40 


49.68 


100. 


. 6.07 


12.15 18.22 

A XmiT-MT" AT 


24.29 30.36 


36.44 


12.38 


24.75 37.13 

AMOUNT AT 


49.50 61.88 

6 PERCENT 


74.26 




Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly 


Yearly Yearly 


Yearly Yearly Yearly 




cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 


cost 




per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 




acre,l 


acre, 2 


acre, 3 


acre, I, 


acre, 5 


acre, 6 


acre, 1 


acre, 2 


acre, S 


acre, i 


acre, 5 


acre, 6 


Yrs. 


cent. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cent. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


cents. 


.30.. 


. $0.66 


$1.33 


$1.99 


$2.66 


$3.32 


$3.99 


$0.79 


$1.58 


$2.37 


$3.16 


$3.95 


$4.74 


40.. 


. 1.21 


2.42 


3.62 


4.83 


6.04 


7.25 


1.55 


,3.10 


4.64 


6.19 


7.74 


9.29 


50.. 


. 2.09 


4.19 


6.28 


8.37 


10.47 


12.56 


2.90 


5.81 


8.71 


11.61 


14.52 


17.42 


60.. 


. 3.54 


7.07 


10.61 


14.14 


17.68 


21.22 


5.33 


10.66 


15.99 


21.33 


26.66 


31.99 


70.. 


. 5.89 


11.77 


17.66 


23.154 


29.43 


35.31 


9.68 


19.36 


29.04 


88.72 


48.40 


58.08 


80.. 


. 9.71 


19.42 


29.14 


38.85 


48.56 


58.27 


17.47 


34.93 


52.40 


69.87 


87.33 


104.80 


90.. 


.15.95 


31.89 


47.84 


63.78 


79.73 


95.68 


31.41 


62.82 


94.23 


125.65 


157.06 188.47 


100. 


.26.10 


52.20 


78..30 


104.40 


1.30.50 


1.56.60 


.56.. 39 


112.77 


169.16 


225.54 


281.93 338..?! 



PD 10.4 



18 






<;'>y/ 















-V 







^■^^ . 


























\ 



<J-^ 



^*° .... "^--. •" A» .. 





































,0-^ -. 



<{.^ 



, « = , ^ C 






.'^^ 



A 






■0^ 






a'< 

.0. 






' aO v. -• ^"^ o. 

-'0^ c,* - "" ^''^ Kt^ <\v ♦ 






^ ":v%^^" y% '-j^i^/ / \ ^^^- y'\ \^.^v 

f ^ "^ ^5>^ °^ ^O""' 






0- .' ".^ o^ 









^^0^ 



.^ 









*1 o^ 



\\, 



V /«■-■' Tt. , 



rX'^- 



t<. 



o 















►. DOBBS BROS. „ t iP 

»<, LIBRARY SINOING C"^ eP 

E B 7 4 X'^ '^ 

ST. AUGUSTINE O 

m^m FLA. 

^^32084 




♦V-'"'^ ' 






^0 v>. 






A 



■ ^■' 



•0^ 



'o 



.^!-^' 



